Servers by jDrones

Barometer Anomaly, two barometer sensor instances are created in pixhawk (old version 1)

(Arjun Kapoor) #1

Quadcopter faced a barometer sensor issue, the quadcopter was in air and was at 200m and suddenly at HUD in GCS it started displaying 4 meters altitude. Still the quadcopter was in air, then i hit RTL, for the safe RTL path, it climbed from 200 meters to 300 meters as the internal NavEKF get_altitude was returning 4m altitude, so autopilot gained height to reach 100m but actually reached 300m+

Now, the reason for this what i am thinking is, num_sensors has got value =2 and two instances are created that means AP_BARO_MS5611 *probe has init two instances of baro sensors, when there was just one, it maybe because of bus restart or num_sensors++ that i am not able to figure out,
Secondly, can 4m of altitude can be a outcome of EKF getting applied on two baro, BARO and BAR2, BARO having altitude =0 and BAR2 altitude = 200.

I am attaching the logs, please respond soon, as it can be a bug and needs to be addressed.
here is the link to the logs

ArduCopter version, 3.4.5

(rmackay9) #2

Just from a quick look at the logs it looks like the barometer is not functioning. At least the BARO messages don’t seem to have any values.

It’s possible the altitude on the HUD changed because the vehicle took off without a good position estimate. The moment the altitude changed was the moment it did attain a good position estimate and recorded it’s home position.

1 Like
(Arjun Kapoor) #3

BARO is having a constant error value, and BAR2 instance has the real Barometer sensor value, so thinking of it as BAR2 instance of log means in Baro backend it sensed two sensors, when there was just one,

can it be because the BARO may have failed on the start ? and start giving values afterwards

(rmackay9) #4

OK. I’m not sure we supported multiple barometers in Copter-3.4. At least personally, I’ve only tested external barometers with Copter-3.6 (wiki). How does upgrading to 3.6 at least as a test sound? It’s going to be difficult for me to dig into an issue from 3.4 but on the otherhand I’m keen to resolve issues for 3.6 (and higher).

1 Like
(Arjun Kapoor) #5

sure, thanks for the time, i will surely upgrade ! Thanks again